User talk:DavidWBrooks/2012 archive

January 2012 Newsletter for WikiProject United States and supported projects
--Kumi-Taskbot (talk) 18:54, 16 January 2012 (UTC)

Used to travel...
had a good chuckle at your comment re: the caption. You're absolutely right, but sadly far too many people traveling now are like guidebook, what guidebook? StarM 05:48, 22 January 2012 (UTC)

MSU Interview
Dear David,

My name is Jonathan Obar user:Jaobar, I'm a professor in the College of Communication Arts and Sciences at Michigan State University and a Teaching Fellow with the Wikimedia Foundation's Education Program. This semester I've been running a little experiment at MSU, a class where we teach students about becoming Wikipedia administrators. Not a lot is known about your community, and our students (who are fascinated by wiki-culture by the way!) want to learn how you do what you do, and why you do it. A while back I proposed this idea (the class) to the community HERE, were it was met mainly with positive feedback. Anyhow, I'd like my students to speak with a few administrators to get a sense of admin experiences, training, motivations, likes, dislikes, etc. We were wondering if you'd be interested in speaking with one of our students.

So a few things about the interviews:
 * Interviews will last between 15 and 30 minutes.
 * Interviews can be conducted over skype (preferred), IRC or email. (You choose the form of communication based upon your comfort level, time, etc.)
 * All interviews will be completely anonymous, meaning that you (real name and/or pseudonym) will never be identified in any of our materials, unless you give the interviewer permission to do so.
 * All interviews will be completely voluntary. You are under no obligation to say yes to an interview, and can say no and stop or leave the interview at any time.
 * The entire interview process is being overseen by MSU's institutional review board (ethics review). This means that all questions have been approved by the university and all students have been trained how to conduct interviews ethically and properly.

Bottom line is that we really need your help, and would really appreciate the opportunity to speak with you. If interested, please send me an email at obar@msu.edu (to maintain anonymity) and I will add your name to my offline contact list. If you feel comfortable doing so, you can post your name HERE instead.

If you have questions or concerns at any time, feel free to email me at obar@msu.edu. I will be more than happy to speak with you.

Thanks in advance for your help. We have a lot to learn from you.

Sincerely,

Jonathan Obar --Jaobar (talk) 02:52, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

New England Telephone
I have noticed that you reverted my last edits to New England Telephone. According to the New York Secretary of State's office, this link indicates New England Telephone, founded in 1883, is still alive and well today as Verizon New England. I realize that the break-off of the Northern New England operations and sale to FairPoint diminished 3 states from the 5 it served, but the company this article refers to is far from defunct. I added in the infobox because every other page on Bell operating companies, which I admit I have been a large contributor to or creator of, indicate if they have gone defunct (the original 1879 Southern Bell, Northwestern Bell, South Central Bell, and Pacific Northwest Bell) because they have officially ceased to exist. I think to say New England Telephone, even in its existence under the name Verizon New England, has ceased to exist is misleading and isn't accurate. What do you think? KansasCity (talk) 14:22, 13 February 2012 (UTC)
 * I wanted to make sure that it was clear that New England Telephone and Telegraph Company, under the name Verizon New England, still exists to this day and has not ceased to exist as your edits to the page had left it. The way you had worded that article made it seem like the company legally went defunct once the lines were sold to FairPoint, which is not the case at all, as 1 company then became 3 companies. Thank you for clarifying the disambiguation page. I heard no response about my above idea all week so that's why I went ahead and changed it. KansasCity (talk) 15:40, 18 February 2012 (UTC)
 * I do think that the telephone lines and jingle are important; however, I have always understood Wikipedia to strive to provide the most accurate information possible. While it is true that what was "New England Telephone" has pretty much ceased to exist at least in the way that it conducted business years ago, that doesn't mean that the company has gone away. Sure, it serves a smaller group of people than before but it's still alive and well. That's why I have spent so much time on the Bell Operating Companies over the years because I have been very interested in Bell and its history. I think it is important for people to know that companies such as Verizon, Qwest Corporation, etc. were actually rooted in the Bell System and aren't just some start-ups that happened to come about in the 2000s. I didn't mean to cause a stir about this, I simply wanted to make sure it was as accurate as possible. KansasCity (talk) 15:47, 18 February 2012 (UTC)

Minced oath
Regarding your reversal of my edit, and trying to avoid an editing war, I'd like to contest your opinion or solicit a third party to arbitrate or, at least, opine. Yes, "frig" is a euphemism for the "F word", but it is a profane word in its own right, so, i suppose, it could be reckoned either way, but considering the excessively long list of minced oaths given for the word in question, I don't see any reason to include a word that *could* be interpreted as a minced oath, especially since, IMHO, lumping it in parallel with things that are either not words at all are are unrelated words, simply obfuscates the fact that "to frig" is a word in its own right. Vincent J. Lipsio (talk) 18:39, 14 February 2012 (UTC)

regarding advertising videos on Nashua
The content videos are informative why would this not be useful to someone in Nashua or looking to learn about Nashua? This would help local businesses. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.31.64.241 (talk) 03:10, 18 February 2012 (UTC)


 * Wikipedia, rightly or wrongly, has long frowned on external links to advertising-only content. You can understand why - otherwise every article would be beseiged with "helpful" links from companies extolling their wonderfulness, burying any objective links. - DavidWBrooks (talk) 14:14, 18 February 2012 (UTC)

Substing User Talk Templates
Hi there! When using certain templates on talk pages, such as welcome templates and user warnings, don't forget to substitute with text by adding subst: to the template tag. For example, use instead of. This reduces server load and prevents accidental blanking of the template. If you need any further help on the matter just ask me on my talk page. Cheers. ·Add§hore·  T alk T o M e ! 01:44, 6 March 2012 (UTC)

References in Go article
Hello, and thanks for responding to my point about missing references in the article.

Wikipedia lives on providing reliable information. We know that information is reliable when we can verify it. For that reason, references are critical. If, as you say, the references appear later in the article, then why not include them in the introduction? Those statements that are not supported must be revised or eliminated.

Together, we can make it a swell entry.

TippTopp (talk) 11:42, 22 March 2012 (UTC)

New Hampshire
It seems to me the "Free State" paragraph does not belong in the main New Hampshire article as it's rather a fringe idea and is being given undue weight merely by being included. But perhaps it has received substantial mainstream coverage that I am not aware of. As a casual reader though it seems oddly out of place.  N419 BH  19:13, 26 March 2012 (UTC)
 * I see, thanks!  N419 BH  04:44, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

You're invited! New England Wikimedia General Meeting
Message delivered by Dominic at 09:09, 11 April 2012 (UTC). Note: You can remove your name from this meetup invite list here.

Tommy Cooper
Hi David. Sorry I missed your talk page comment. Last night I adjusted and added a source for the taxi fare anecdote. But now you've removed the whole paragraph? There was a futher anecdote in the documentary about Cooper habitually carrying a cigarette case with a single cigarette. These seem perfectly reliable "anecdotes" and I'm not sure how one would find any source more reliable. "Gossip" yes, but apparently well known in showbiz circles. Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 11:21, 29 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the reply David. I posted here as I wasn't sure if you were deliberately removing what I had just added! But great to see some hooves, haha. "Darn these hooves! I hit the wrong switch again! Who designs these instrument panels, raccoons?" Martinevans123 (talk) 12:32, 29 April 2012 (UTC)

Err...
I'm very very sorry about that. I truly am. It's worse than it seems. I left a warning on a sysop's talk page. I'm really really sorry. I'll ensure that this never happens again. Sorry, --Rsrikanth05 (talk) 17:46, 30 April 2012 (UTC)

Discussion at Wikipedia_talk:Hatnote#Trivial_hatnote_links
You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia_talk:Hatnote. KarlB (talk) 18:57, 3 May 2012 (UTC)

Reversion of happy number edits
I submit that the omitted part of the proof is not itself a proof, but rather a calculation, perhaps falling under this policy. i.e. it would consist of 99 lines of work like f(79) = 72 + 92 = 130. f(130) = 12 + 32 = 10. f(10) = 12 + 02 = 1. No citation will be found, as no source will deem such a work worthy of publication. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.83.151.41 (talk) 11:35, 5 May 2012 (UTC)

Clement Vallandigham
Hi David. Is the problem, in the List of Unusual Deaths, with the fact that it was a hotel room and not the court house? Or with the fact that the source was a TV programme? That series does publish annual-type books, so it might have appeared (or will appear) in print - not that I'm sure that would be much of a better source. But I see that there are no sources at the original article. So perhaps a good source would remedy both prblems? Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 19:33, 24 May 2012 (UTC)

PurpleChez
I was in the architecture program at Carnegie-Mellon '84-'86. One morning I walked into a class as two of my buddies were re-living a scene from One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest, which had been on TV the night before. I just happened to come in at "Nice shot, Chezeroo!" (from one of the basketball games), so I ended up being Chezie. There is a pool company in Cheswick PA, up the Allegheny from Pittsburg, whose mascot is the Purple Chezie, and a little bit later that's where the 'purple' came from. PurpleChez (talk) 20:46, 1 June 2012 (UTC)

The World article
Hi David - I noticed that you are a prime contributor to the wikipedia article on The World Ship. I have been living on the ship for many years, hence I really know the subject first hand. I made a few changes and to correct inaccurate and outdated info. I hope you will let them stand. Wikipedia editing is new to me, so I hope I didn't mess up any tags. Just wanted to correct the copy. OK? Thanks! Richard — Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.7.154.116 (talk) 19:08, 30 June 2012 (UTC)

Portal bar
Hi, I see that you moved "See also {Portal bar}" at Pigeon Post into External links with the navigation boxes. --because there were no See also except the Portal.

For what it's worth, I have created scores of "See also shortcuts alone" this week, during their inactive discussion at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Layout. Meanwhile I have avoided creating "External links navbox alone", also under discussion Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Layout, because I have determined that template worldcat is a convenient EL in every book article.

If you skim that entire talk page, or Template talk: Authority control, you'll see that the problem(s) of internal and external links layout are under discussion more generally. Some people's crutch, template Navbox link was deleted last fortnight. I suppose most active editors hope for resolution soon --at least for articles on books, which seem not to generate scads of ordinary See also and External links, and sometimes have none.

Re: Electric Brae
I recently updated the Electric Brae page and it was reverted advising that I'd need to provide sources for the explanation.

I'm the source of the explanation and have detailed how to undo the perception while there. The extra information I've provided doesn't contradict anything already included, it only adds to it. Of course I can provide photographic evidence - but this would only further prove that it _is_ an illusion - which isn't new information. Also, the Cairn Stone itself doesn't have detail within it's explanation other than mentioning that it's due to the "Configuration of the land".

Thank you, Stephen — Preceding unsigned comment added by NARkwS (talk • contribs) 12:01, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

Electric Brae (again)
There's a very good reason for my nube behaviour. Can you guess it?

Since I'm unsure what's conventional when messaging on Wikipedia I'm just advising that I've replied to your response to my earlier query at the page NARkwS.

NARkwS (talk) 16:46, 6 August 2012 (UTC)


 * Hi David. I have opened a thread here, so that any discussion may be kept in one place. Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 19:24, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

Ruling
"A ruling"? surely you mean a reddening, a penning, or even a dooming? haha. Regards. Martinevans123 (talk) 11:10, 1 October 2012 (UTC)

Discussion style at Numurology
I wanted to talk directly about the article using policy, not opinion. You offer few hints that you actually read the subtleties of civil discussion there or ever grasped, or held the points about Wikipedia policy I clearly appeal to. I have no idea; your few words serve only tempt a personal appeal to ones own FUD, and you exacerbate by slashing and burning many many words out of the article. That's why I'm here.

Try explaining the basis for your opinions: To wit, you have yet to display the all-important substance of what is actually, as you say: Please. &mdash; Cp i r al Cpiral  21:16, 5 October 2012 (UTC)
 * that my thoughts are irrelevant there concerning the "taste" factor that the MoS suggests is for debate, so you are right to offer no response to them there, and you have right to ignore the hard-work there making up the request for thoughts on the taste factor there
 * that you have a right to move on to more editing on the very same article because your past edits are beyond question (Continued editing on the very same article under discussion makes it obvious you have time, and perhaps even the discernment to make massive edits on the very same article under discussion, which makes you look callous and haughty to other editors interested in the same article, which makes life difficult for the wrong reasons.)
 * that I misunderstand Wikipedia and its relation to information, or
 * that an appeal to policy on the talk page is not worth a response
 * valuable about the information in the external link in question
 * tasteful about the external link in question
 * what namespace WP is


 * Please keep the conversation at the article, so others can chime in if they wish. - 71.168.70.45 (talk) 21:58, 5 October 2012 (UTC)


 * Certainly. This edit thread is currently numbered 24, which is very unlucky. Or is it lucky, I'm not sure. Martinevans123 (talk) 22:47, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for October 8
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Backpacking (travel), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Posh (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 12:06, 8 October 2012 (UTC)

FLotilla
--Mobilesventek (talk) 20:30, 16 October 2012 (UTC)Mr. Brooks - request explanation for removal of reference to Flotilla in Something Wicked This Way Comes subsection 'The Novel in Pop Culture.' There are no fewer than 19 other references to this novel from other arenas, some of them more popular than others. Why was my reference to Flotilla removed?


 * You're right - there was a lot of dreck in that pop-culture list; I've removed all those which don't use it in the title or as a major theme (as in King). - DavidWBrooks (talk) 00:22, 17 October 2012 (UTC)

Mont Vernon
Hi David, what's your opinion about keeping the Cates home invasion in the town's history section? I can understand an editor's wish to remove the mention of a traumatic event, but I'm not ready to remove an incident that was widely reported around the state. In cases like this, it's always good to hear a third opinion (or more). --Ken Gallager (talk) 14:30, 23 October 2012 (UTC)


 * Sorry, Ken, but I'd rather not touch this one; it's the sort of thing that could get in the way of our coverage of the community. - DavidWBrooks (talk) 14:32, 23 October 2012 (UTC)


 * Understood. Thanks, --Ken Gallager (talk) 14:33, 23 October 2012 (UTC)

Talk:Free_State_Project
Please comment on the talk page. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom  22:46, 25 October 2012 (UTC)

Multiple, pointless synonyms
I hope that this change survives. There was something of a slow-motion edit war from 2009 to 2012 over which of those "pointless synonyms" to choose, but the hostilities appear to have subsided. Happy editing, Cnilep (talk) 00:09, 10 November 2012 (UTC)

About removing file "Bust of a Woman" (pareidolia)
Hi David. I agree with you, the picture I used was not the best. Please just take a look at this file, it is much more convincing. The "Guardian of the Gorges" is one of the most famous natural attractions in the south of France and a very good example of pareidolia, confirmed by most tourist guides. This rock has also been retained by decision of the French authorities during the construction of the road, as the effect was strange and impressive. Otherwise it would have been mercilessly blasted as all other rocks. Please see also French article about pareidolia. Maybe you will be ok for the inclusion of the alternative version of the file? Thank you in advance. Sincerely yours, AgotaOui ? Plaît-il ? / Déversoir 23:56, 13 November 2012 (UTC)
 * No news of you, I have integrated the new version I told you about. You can judge for yourself. Hoping that this is acceptable to you, Sincerely, AgotaOui ? Plaît-il ? / Déversoir 21:12, 14 November 2012 (UTC)

Okay!
"Oll Korrekt", "Ola Kala" and the rest of the OK-origin theories are unsubstantial. Even the "Old Kinderhook" assumption is obviously a posterior use of an existing expression. Why do you have such a hard time grasping the correct etymology (OK, from Oc), even suggested in List of proposed etymologies of OK? Are you so satisfied with a list of ridiculous theories, that you cannot stand the obvious, more than a ludicrous "good faith" time span? Steliokardam (talk) 16:46, 19 November 2012 (UTC)

Telegraph article
Great piece in the Telegraph. I won't touch the Telegraph article :) but I've started a discussion thread on your piece here if you would like to stop by (you are cordially invited). Best, Andreas JN 466 16:51, 19 November 2012 (UTC)
 * How do you respond on wikipediocracy (which sounds like a weird sex practice, frankly)? It said my wikipedia user name didn't exist ... do I need to create another account? - DavidWBrooks (talk) 20:22, 19 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Yes, via the Register link (top middle). It's not a WMF site, but a group blog cum public forum that was established when Wikipedia Review went downhill. Andreas JN 466 00:25, 20 November 2012 (UTC)
 * It keeps telling me Wikimedia Foundation is the wrong answer to the question ... and then I exceeded the number of attempts to register. I am an outcast. - DavidWBrooks (talk) 01:12, 20 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Let me have a word with our admin ... Andreas JN 466 03:18, 20 November 2012 (UTC)
 * It worked this time. - DavidWBrooks (talk) 12:25, 20 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Great. The account is activated, and you should be all ready to go now. Sorry about the hiccup. Andreas JN 466 20:30, 20 November 2012 (UTC)

I also read the article with interest, and I thought it was well written. Thanks for the read. Biosthmors (talk) 20:15, 19 November 2012 (UTC)

Merry Christmas


Cnilep (talk) is wishing you a Merry Christmas! This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Happy New Year!

Spread the cheer by adding {{subst:Xmas2}} to their talk page with a friendly message.